Bug 194910
| Summary: | [PATCH] Mention svnlite(1) in Makefile.inc1, make.conf(5) and build(7) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Documentation | Reporter: | Juan Ramón Molina Menor <info> | ||||
| Component: | Manual Pages | Assignee: | freebsd-bugs (Nobody) <bugs> | ||||
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||
| Severity: | Affects Many People | CC: | doc, netchild | ||||
| Priority: | --- | ||||||
| Version: | Latest | ||||||
| Hardware: | Any | ||||||
| OS: | Any | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
A commit references this bug: Author: netchild Date: Sat Aug 11 13:18:20 UTC 2018 New revision: 337621 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/337621 Log: Add svnlite to places where svn is mentioned. The Makefile part in the PR is solved already differently, so this part is skipped form the PR The man page change change is slightly changed to adapt to the way the Makefile works and to the spirit of what is intended here. Submitted by: Juan Ram?n Molina Menor <info@juanmolina.eu> PR: 194910 Sponsored by: Essen Hackathon Changes: head/share/man/man5/make.conf.5 head/share/man/man7/build.7 Committed (except Makefile, as already solved differently), and slight rework of the man page to match what the Makefile does. Thanks! |
Created attachment 149222 [details] Patch for adding svnlite(1) to Makefile.inc1, make.conf(5) and build(7) There seems to be an inconsistency with svnlite(1). The initial commit (r251886) says that it was included for checking out and committing source. Nevertheless, the make.conf man page says, in the SVN_UPDATE section, that no subversion client is included in the base system, and indeed 'make update' does not work by default, as it searches for /usr/local/bin/svn. I have attached a naive patch which replaces svn(1) by svnlite(1) in the build(7) and make.conf(5) pages, as well as the path to svnlite(1) in Makefile.inc1. In Makefile.inc1, it would be nice to account for the possibility of an user setting WITH_SVN in src.conf(5) and thus obtaining a 'svn' binary instead of 'svnlite', but I'm not competent enough to do this properly. If the idea of this patch is accepted, I think we should also consider resolving #194080. Hope it helps, Juan